Thread: Boycott 'The Petone Gunshop"...

I copied this from a facebook post (without permission)
But sums up Greg O'conners submission very well.

Originally Posted by Maca49

Piss off! Not all oldies are like that, what you forget is with age comes a little wisdom and more common sense!!
Dont forget just because its new doesn't mean its better!!

Of course the new way is better or we wouldn't have replaced the old ways with the new ways!

Originally Posted by kotuku

go back and read massives last post OK.
Anyhow who died and made you god for that matter.
FYI-Ive never had a post deleted here ,thats what i find refreshing.,unlike mr a hammonds website,which if youre of a more delicate nature you may prefer. they also love censorship and toadying over there.
finally ive known and shot with massive over a few years now ,so the big fella can handle it!
i sincerely hope this puts yours and any others anxieties to rest. goodday to you all.

Sorry tube but you need better data from the Great Google. My A Hammond makes the good (but not brightly colored) duck and goose calls. Mr Alan Simmons runs the hunt n fish forum with the much used delete button.

The more evolved humans have given up trying to remember stuff like this and just offload the info to the Great Google up in the intercloud so we can retrieve it when necessary. I am not joking, to confirm I had Alan's last name right I googled for it.

My final comment on all this is how can a bloke who has built a business out of selling ex military service rifles (the technical term is Main Battle Rifle but I like to call them Baby Killers cos it's more emotional) have an opinion on how nobody should be allowed to buy commercial copies of the current military service rifle? A 303 may seem safe and cuddly cos grandad had one but it's a high powered baby killer with a high capacity magazine (10 shot) that can kill multiple babies at 1000m even if they are hiding behind a tree. The sooner the baby killer rifles are confiscated and replaced with harmless small caliber modern sporting rifles using restricted capacity magazines the better.

Originally Posted by MassiveAttack

Of course the new way is better or we wouldn't have replaced the old ways with the new ways!

Time for a TUI! Yeah Right!!

Originally Posted by grunzter

Ok, to add fuel to the fire, roll your eyes when you read Greg O'conners submission... police association president
http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en...8d29e62416356b

But there are also a few good submissions as well...

...It seems a lot easier to put a submission in now after its closed, than when it was open???

Well reading that lot of drivel from Greg was not in the least bit informative.

I read the submission he made several times and cannot see what the fuss is about. sure he wrote

"Membership of clubs and associations that promoted ‘traditional’ deliberate target shooting has been replaced by growth in organisations that promote competitions in which precision shooting is enhanced with movement, engaging multiple targets, and employing high rates of fire. This is not a reflection on committed and responsible users."

Which seems to be the target of a lot of the comments. But please read it carefully. All it states is that the nature of target shooting has changed from the "traditional" (lie down and poke a hole in a target) to the "precision shooting is enhanced with movement, engaging multiple targets, and employing high rates of fire"." which does describe the evolution of target shooting as it has moved into things like three gun etc. So no deception or misinformation there. Pretty simple statement of the situation.

The whole issue seems to be around the "This is not a reflection on committed and responsible users" comment. This, unfortunately can be taken two ways. The way everyone here seems to be reacting to is that this rapid fire dynamic movement is not a reflection of responsible users but the way I read it, and which I suspect it was supposed to be read is that the dynamic sea change in the activities is not a negative reflection on users but a natural progression that responsible users take. Thus the change itself is not a reflection on committed and responsible users.

I think that at the end of the day he has put his submission forwards and made his opinion known. If you disagree with his opinion then the place to do that would have been by making your own submission. If you did not bother then that s like complaining about the political party in power when you didn't bother to vote. If you don't say something when you have the chance, dont expect to be listened to afterwards......

I do not agree with a lot of his submission, but find it ironic that people are so upset when they did not bother to make a submission themselves.....

Originally Posted by Rushy

Well reading that lot of drivel from Greg was not in the least bit informative.

I read Joe Green's submission instead, much more sensible and worthwhile.

Originally Posted by Rushy

Well reading that lot of drivel from Greg was not in the least bit informative.

I got plenty out of that Rushy. Basically he said his lads were too busy writing death reports at the bottom of the cliff. As a result of this he would like to remove everyone's legs to stop anyone getting to the top of the cliff. Unfortunately he completely missed the opportunity to just send a couple of his lads up the hill to turn the few walking to the cliff away.

Basically his lads need to get back to basic policing and stop the rot at a much earlier stage. This needs the backing of the Police hierarchy, courts, parliament and the rest of the good people of this country.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Need to be careful making allegations like this. The inference is that he has held or kept people's deposits unlawfully. If that is not what you meant you should say so. If it is what you meant you need to be prepared to stump up with the evidence if he sues you for defamation. No one is anonymous.

he has given deposits back as far as I know , people have waited several years for gear that other importers seem to not have trouble bringing in before pulling the pin and going somewhere else.

Originally Posted by grunzter

I copied this from a facebook post (without permission)
But sums up Greg O'conners submission very well.

Attachment 50894

A bit mischievous, the word used is offender.

We're becoming as bad as the Yanks, misquoting to bolster an argument.

The Rural Women in NZ is asupportive submission http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en...0df0bb3caa6a4a

Originally Posted by stug

The Rural Women in NZ is asupportive submission http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en...0df0bb3caa6a4a

Concise and logical submission. Expand the NZP budget and enforce the existing laws. Need to work on their editing though, lol - "4000 firearms ceased by Customs".

Originally Posted by timattalon

I read the submission he made several times and cannot see what the fuss is about. sure he wrote

"Membership of clubs and associations that promoted ‘traditional’ deliberate target shooting has been replaced by growth in organisations that promote competitions in which precision shooting is enhanced with movement, engaging multiple targets, and employing high rates of fire. This is not a reflection on committed and responsible users."

Which seems to be the target of a lot of the comments. But please read it carefully. All it states is that the nature of target shooting has changed from the "traditional" (lie down and poke a hole in a target) to the "precision shooting is enhanced with movement, engaging multiple targets, and employing high rates of fire"." which does describe the evolution of target shooting as it has moved into things like three gun etc. So no deception or misinformation there. Pretty simple statement of the situation.

The whole issue seems to be around the "This is not a reflection on committed and responsible users" comment. This, unfortunately can be taken two ways. The way everyone here seems to be reacting to is that this rapid fire dynamic movement is not a reflection of responsible users but the way I read it, and which I suspect it was supposed to be read is that the dynamic sea change in the activities is not a negative reflection on users but a natural progression that responsible users take. Thus the change itself is not a reflection on committed and responsible users.

I think that at the end of the day he has put his submission forwards and made his opinion known. If you disagree with his opinion then the place to do that would have been by making your own submission. If you did not bother then that s like complaining about the political party in power when you didn't bother to vote. If you don't say something when you have the chance, dont expect to be listened to afterwards......

I do not agree with a lot of his submission, but find it ironic that people are so upset when they did not bother to make a submission themselves.....

I read it the same as you mate.
Only thing I found annoying about the submission was registration of all firearms. Pointless imo.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Ryan

Concise and logical submission. Expand the NZP budget and enforce the existing laws. Need to work on their editing though, lol - "4000 firearms ceased by Customs".

If they ended up being destroyed it wouldn't be completely wrong.